Skip to main content
Glama

Traceable

by com.traceabledocs.app
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

Delete block

traceable_block_delete
DestructiveIdempotent

Soft-delete one block (recoverable in the app). Deleting a table or ID header cascades to its children, and links to deleted trace targets are marked broken — the same semantics as deleting the row in the editor. atOrder must come from a read issued after the last insert (inserts renumber later rows); the response echoes the deleted row's itemId — verify it hit the intended row. Prefer itemId anchoring.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
itemIdNoTraceID of the block to delete
atOrderNoRow order of the block to delete (the [[row N]] anchor)
documentIdYesThe document UUID
baseRevisionNoThe revision (meta.revision) from the traceable_doc_read, or the previous write, this change is based on. When given, the write is refused with nothing changed if the document has changed since, so you never overwrite edits you have not seen. Each write returns the current revision. The revision tracks the document's content rows, so changes that touch no row (its name and other metadata, the reference list, Test Plan entries) return it unchanged. A revision is an opaque value: compare it whole, never read meaning into its parts (they are not a counter).

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedInput schema / properties / baseRevision
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "The revision (meta.revision) from the traceable_doc_read, or the previous write, this change is based on. When given, the write is refused with nothing changed if the document has changed since, so you never overwrite edits you have not seen. Each write returns the current revision. The revision tracks the document's content rows, so changes that touch no row (its name and other metadata, the reference list, Test Plan entries) return it unchanged. A revision is an opaque value: compare it whole, never read meaning into its parts (they are not a counter).",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.7/5.0
Behavior5/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, yet the description still adds substantial beyond-schema context: soft-delete is recoverable, deleting a table/ID header cascades to children, and inbound links are marked broken. It also warns that atOrder goes stale after inserts and that the response echoes itemId for verification.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three dense sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and effect, then the concurrency/freshness caveat, then the anchoring preference. No filler; each clause carries actionable information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a destructive mutation with no output schema, the description covers the essential facts: reversibility, cascade scope, link side effects, ordering freshness, and result verification. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description earns extra credit by explaining operational semantics the schema omits — that atOrder must come from a read issued after the last insert and that itemId anchoring is preferred. It adds genuine usage meaning over the parameter docs.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('soft-delete one block') and immediately distinguishes itself from the write/update siblings by noting it is recoverable in-app with editor-equivalent semantics. An agent can tell it apart from traceable_block_update and traceable_block_write without opening a schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives a concrete anchoring rule ('Prefer itemId anchoring') and clarifies cascade behavior so the agent knows the blast radius. It stops short of an explicit comparison to the sibling update/write tools or a when-not statement, so it falls just below full routing guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Traceable toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources